Class £^7 3 
Book ^ 



A M E I\ J C A 



L E T T ERS 

BY 

VIGIL. 

Reprinted. from the "Torquay Directory; 



LONDON : 
SIMPK1N, MAK8HALL, & CO. 

COCK REM, TORQUAY. 
1872. 



2- I 



vt7 



AMERICA. 



LETTER I 

February 14th, 1872. 

It has been truly observed by a semi-official Russian 
journal, that any prolonged, cordial understanding 
between Great Britain and America is simply impos- 
sible. Not that Englishmen harbour hostile sentiments 
towards their trans- Atlantic kinsmen, whom they re- 
gard with the most friendly feelings ; but because 
American rulers are ever prone to adopt a rapacious 
policy, being imbued with boundless ambition, and in- 
cited by an unscrupulous press well versed in the art 
of insolent bullying. So far as the writers recollection 
serves him, some subject of dispute between England 
and America has always been kept alive by the Cabinet 
of Washington ; in readiness, perhaps, for sharper con- 
tention, whenever this country should be involved in 
serious difficulties. Before the close of the last century 
misunderstandings had arisen between us, not alto- 
gether unprovoked on our part ; although the States 
were fain to endure far greater indignities at the hands 
of France. In 181 2, ere the tide of fortune had turned 



4 



against Napoleon, advancing then at the head of a vast 
army to impose terms of submission upon Russia, and 
when Britain was engaged in carrying on a world-wide 
contest, the American Congress unexpectedly declared 
war against us, in the confident expectation of being 
able to seize upon Canada. Yet, though that province 
was wholly unprepared for defence, having then but a 
comparatively scanty population, not only were the in- 
vaders repulsed, but Canadian Volunteers and Militia 
actually conquered Michigan, which they held till peace 
was concluded. 

In all our negotiations with the United States we 
have been completely foiled, surrendering almost every 
point in dispute. It was thus in the Bay Islands dif- 
ference, and upon the frontier question. On this latter 
occasion, America rejected an award pronounced after 
long deliberation by the King of Holland, who had 
been mutually chosen as an arbitrator, and which as- 
signed the long-coveted settlement of Madawaska to 
Canada. Nevertheless, when, some years later, tha,t 
district had been weakly ceded by Lord Ashburton, it 
became known that there existed among the archives 
at Washington a map, traced by Franklin's own hand, 
ascribing that territory to the British possessions. Un- 
luckily, all these concessions, made out of pure good 
will, in order to ensure amicable relations between two 
peoples nearly allied in blood, invariably fail to attain 
their object ; whilst they are usually attributed by 
foreign Powers to our apprehension of war. Such a 



5 



calamity, however, might inflict much heavier losses on 
Americans, than upon ourselves. For if, as has been 
openly menaced, any attempt were made forcibly to 
occupy the island of St. Juan, — a position of great im- 
portance to our ships in the North Pacific, — or to violate 
the Canadian frontier, it seems by no means improbable 
that an inevitably consequent naval war would result 
in renewed revolt of the late Confederate States, whose 
hatred of their Northern conquerors will outlive the 
existing generation. That fanatical anti slavery spirit 
which animated Federalists, filling their armies with 
recruits during the insurrectionary civil war, no longer 
now prevails ; and even other sub-divisions might pos- 
sibly take place. Nor need the admirers of this over- 
grown Republic deplore disruptions which would leave 
each section more at liberty to pursue its own diver- 
gent interests. " I see no objection," wrote President 
Jefferson, on the cession of Louisiana, "to the appre- 
hended severance of our Confederation into two or more 
separated Republics ; since I consider the earlier, and 
the more recently planted states, in the light only of 
elder and younger brethren, who need remain no longer 
united than may suit their interest and their happi- 
ness." Such a redi vision of powerful States, each 
abundantly strong for self-defence, should be no cause 
of grief to European nations, who would no longer then 
be exposed to often urged inordinate demands, accom- 
panied by threats of violence. " As for enemies," writes 
the author of a political pamphlet published more than 



6 



thirty years ago, " Europe at least lias 110 motive to 
meddle in any way with the Southern States. We are 
not its rivals in agriculture, trade, or manufactures ; 
and nature has bound us together in cords of perpetual 
friendship. We raise the raw material, and they manu- 
facture it. It is the people of the North whom I fear. 
The Tariff Bill, though in form and colour a revenue 
measure, was in truth an Act for rendering the South 
tributary to the North. As regards Great Britain and 
the Plantation States, thus stands the case. We can 
raise cotton, she cannot. She can manufacture, we 
cannot ; and a mutually beneficial exchange of the 
commodity each is able to supply on the best terms 
might be carried on between us, supporting in good 
measure the industry of both. There is no rivalry, 
therefore, nor is there likely to be any, between Europe 
and the Plantation States ; as there is, and ever must 
be, between Old England and New England. Our true 
interest is in a free and uninterrupted commerce with 
the whole world, and particularly with England, where 
are workshops sufficient to work up the raw material 
which we raise." Such were the well grounded convic- 
tions of Southerners many years before they endea- 
voured by force of arms to emancipate themselves from 
Northern domination, and to achieve their political in- 
dependence ; an attempt in which they unfortunately 
failed after a brave struggle against great odds, being 
heavily weighted with the incubus of slavery now 
happily abolished. 



7 



LETTER II. 

March 22nd, 1872. 

I do not doubt that there are multitudes amongst 
our Western kinsmen who entertain very friendly feel- 
ings towards us. Unfortunately, however, these are not 
the persons who exercise any potential control over the 
Government at Washington ; which is conducted, less, 
perhaps in accordance with national interests, and public 
opinion, — hard to arrive at through the medium of a 
sensational press, than to meet the exigencies of party 
cabals, and electioneering tactics, where there is an 
almost perpetual struggle for political power. There- 
fore, it is that I draw a wide distinction between 
Americans and their Rulers, whose policy is often very 
inimical towards Britain, having been condemned even 
by some of their own most eminent statesmen. What 
can be more hostile than the tone assumed by Mr. 
Sumner, late Chairman of the Foreign Affairs Com- 
mittee in their Senate ; a body constitutionally exer- 
cising important administrative functions ? I am blamed 
for recurring to " old feuds," and for " putting forward 
along array of accusations" against the great 



8 



democratic Eepublic, but was there ever such an 
" array" of past grievances paraded as those con- 
stained in the now famous "American case?" And 
here, permit me to observe, that the absurd idea of 
making Great Britain liable for consequential damages, 
alleged to have been incurred by the United States 
through our " premature" acknowledgment of belli- 
gerent rights in the Southern Confederacy — a claim 
adduced in the Conference at Washington — was doubt- 
less withdrawn because American negociators perceived 
that any such demand must have equally inculpated 
other European Powers, who simultaneously with Eng- 
land, made the very same admission. Even their own 
Cabinet implicitly recognised Southern belligerency by 
proclaiming a blockade of its coasts, and in asserting, 
therefore, the right of search. A recognition of such 
rights becomes indeed indispensable where two mari- 
time people are engaged in hostilities ; unless the 
armed cruisers of one or other party be regarded as 
pirates. Insurrectionary Greece was recognised as a 
belligerent long before she had emancipated herself 
from Mahomedan rule ; and an American Secretary of 
State did not hesitate to instruct one of their diplomatic 
agents, that he should acknowledge the Hungarian 
Provisional Government, then in rebellion against the 
Austrian Emperor, if only he could find its flag flying 
over a single city. 

Many experienced politicians regret that our minis- 
ters rejected urgent instances said to have been made 



9 



by Napoleon 111., for jointly recognising, not alone 
belligerent rights, but the political independence also of 
Southern Confederated States, who had formed then a 
regularly constituted government, and were waging 
successful warfare. After the revolt of our American 
provinces in the last century, France made haste to 
acknowledge their independence, yet without being im- 
mediately involved in war with Britain ; and notwith- 
standing that the famous Paul Jones, with other 
adventurous corsairs, fitted out their privateers in 
French ports, inflicting great injury on English trade- 
Attributed remissness on our part, in suffering the 
Alabama with her consorts to escape, cannot be com- 
parable to such patent complicity, but which never 
formed the ground of any claim for pecuniary repara- 
tion from France ; and yet are we coolly invited to pay 
an almost countless amount of indemnity, for merely 
imputed negligence. Should war be now forced upon 
us, as American papers have threatened, it would be 
well to recollect that there are six or eight millions of 
their people essentially indisposed to the Union ; and 
that not less than five distinct sections of their States 
are influenced by diverse material interests. This will 
hardly be controverted. Years before southern discon- 
tents broke forth into open insurrection, it was easy to 
discern that events tended to some attempted severance. 
Frequently recurring disputes in Congress between 
North and South could admit of no other solution. 
Their animosity was implacable, their recriminations 



10 



were unceasing. " Before next November/' exclaimed 
a New England Legislator, " the South shall be made 
to submit/' "I will yet live/' retorted a Southern 
Senator, " to call over the head roll of my slaves under 
the shadow of Bunker's Hill." So long ago as in 1856, 
I took the liberty of observing that if, in the inevitably 
approaching conflict, " Northerners should prevail, then, 
judging from past occurrences, and from the hatred 
certain to be engendered by internecine strife, it seemed 
clear that slavery would soon be abolished at any cost 
to their antagonists, or even at the hazard of consider- 
able loss to themselves ; and that an onerous tariff, 
protective to Northern products, would be imposed 
on the commerce of their vanquished Confederates." 
These predictions have been long since verified. The 
seceding Republics succumbed to superior forces, being 
tainted with the plague spot of slavery ; and they are 
now taxed at the selfish greed of New England 
manufacturers, instead of having their ports open for 
free trade with all the world. As regards any con- 
templated recognition of the Southern Confederacy, 
the possibility of a strong slave-holding power 
being ever established in the West, has been justly 
deprecated. There could be little doubt, however, 
that under any circumstances, and even had the 
Confederates achieved their independence, slavery 
must have been doomed in America. With the 
coterminous frontier of a free country, where there 
should be no fugitive slave law, it would not have been 



1 1 



practicable any longer to maintain their " domestic 
institution ;" and negro emancipation in the Plantation 
States was therefore a question only of time, or mode. 
Although Southern planters might talk big about 
" re-openiug the slave-trade," they very well knew that 
a recurrence to that crime had become impossible when 
opposed to the determination of civilized mankind. 
Yet, beyond question the then existence of slavery in 
the South did tend to prevent a recognition of its 
independence by European governments ; for few 
people entertain any doubt that it would be advan- 
tageous to other nations, and even perhaps to 
Americans themselves, if their unwieldy Federation 
were re-divided into two or more distinct Republics, 
each section pursuing independently its own several 
interests. "There is a fashion," writes Cooper, in his 
Notions of the Americans " of predicting the separation 
of the United States, and a consequent disorganization 
of society ; but admitting that the prediction should 
be realized, a division of the Confederation into two or 
three Republics is the utmost that can be expected. 
It is a matter of indifference whether our people Kve 
under one, or under a dozen Governments." Certainly 
the union of their present huge Confederacy, cannot 
be needed for purposes of self-defence, since, as an 
English traveller observes, Americans laugh to scorn 
the idea of European aggression. 

The whole system of international arbitration, as 
now proposed, seems to be a, scheme beset with 



12 



difficulties ; and even- assuming that the official coun- 
selors of any selected Sovereign should be wholly 
inaccessible to considerations of State policy, or 
absolutely unbiassed in the advice they might offer. 
When the Trent affair fell out, and four envoys from 
the Southern States, having been seized by an 
American man-of-war from on board one of Her 
Majesty's mail-packets, were imprisoned in Fort 
Warren at Boston, some well-intentioned persons in 
England urged that the matter should be submitted 
for " arbitration/' Lord Palmerston, then Prime 
Minister, being ably supported by his colleagues, 
took a very different view of the question ; and Earl 
Eussell, Secretary for Foreign Affairs, demanded an 
instant release of the persons detained, m order that 
they might again be placed under British protection j 
a requisition which was energetically supported by the 
French Emperor. In an elaborately argumentative 
reply, Mr. Seward attempted to justify the conduct of 
Captain Wilts, commanding the United States cruiser ; 
but he concluded by saying that the four prisoners in 
question would be cheerfully liberated. In the 
meanwhile, however, and although it was mid -winter, 
troops had been dispatched to Canada, and our 
Mediterranean fleet was ordered to the West Indies. 

A well-known eminent jurist, writing under the 
signature of Historic us, clearly indicated the futility 
of arbitration, instancing what had occurred on the 
frontier controversy. " Such then," says this writer 



. 13 

"is the history of an arbitration with the United 
States. In 1827 an agreement is made to abide by 
the award of the arbitrator. It takes two years before 
the ease is stated. Another year elapses before the 
award is made. The Government of the United States 
take a year and a half before they decide whether they 
will be bound by the award : and five years after the 
original agreement of arbitration, they throw the 
award overboard altogether — a course, indeed, in 
which they had been anticipated by their own repre- 
sentative acting without instruction. And then, after 
the lapse of ten years more, the affair is ultimately 
concluded by direct negotiation. If, after this, we can 
go into another arbitration with the United States, the 
lessons of history are indeed no better than an old 
almanack. A Government that should be hoodwinked 
by so illusory a proposition would be more foolish than 
the birds of the air, in whose sight we are told that 
the ' snare of the fowler is set in vain/ " These 
observations are scarcely less apposite now than they 
were at the time of their publication ten years ago. 



14 



LETTEE III. 

April 5th, 1872. 

A rupture of the Washington Treaty seems to have 
been rendered almost inevitable, and it is probable, 
therefore, that no arbitration of any kind will now be 
invoked ; since this ill-starred compact, in which all 
the concessions have been wrung from England, with- 
out any compensating equivalent, should of necessity 
stand or fall in its entirety. Still, I am desirous of 
stating the circumstances under which we long held 
the island of St. Juan in uncontested possession. 

By a treaty concluded at Washington in 1846, it 
was provided that the Anglo-American north-western 
frontier line should run "along the 49th parallel of 
latitude, to the middle of the channel which separates 
the continent from the island of Vancouver, and 
thence southerly through the middle of the said 
channel and of Fuca Straits to the Pacific Ocean/' 
This clear geographical definition would scarcely 
appear to admit of any dispute ; besides that, the 
only channel at that time used by shipping was a 
broad estuary between the Oregon coast and St. Juan, 
leaving that island far within our boundary. It had, 



L5 



in fact, been always considered as belonging to 
England, and in 1846 was occupied by the Hudson's 
Bay Company, who leased it from the Crown as a 
dependency of Vancouver's. They had then a farm 
upon it, with some 2,000 sheep, besides cattle. 
Moreover, according to a correspondent of The 
Times, in a survey made by Colonel Fremont, under 
orders from the Washington Government, and after 
the treaty of 1846, this island was still shown on 
the British side. Nevertheless, in 1859, General 
Harney, conducting a filibustering expedition with 
United States' forces, seized upon a portion of St. 
Juan, and which, by a temporary convention, the 
Americans were suffered to retain in their possession ; 
as, in like manner, we had been previously cajoled 
into abandoning Madawaska, the Mosquito shore, and 
our settlements on Columbia River. Former British 
statesmen promptly repelled attempted encroachments 
at • Newfoundland, Nootka Sound, the Falkland Isles, 
and Honduras ; but in those days no plausible 
appeals were made about "two great nations of the 
same lineage, at the head of civilization, haggling 
over some worthless islet, or strip of desert land" — 
the usual effect of such sentimental pleas being 
thoroughly appreciated by our astute cousins. 

Some umbrage has been taken at my having 
characterized the public press of America as "un- 
scrupulous and addicted to insolent bullying." I might, 
perhaps, have applied similar epithets to the Govern- 



16 

ment at Washington ; but as it is thought that I 
treated American rulers with exceptional severity, 1 
may be permitted to quote higher authority for ex- 
pressions equally forcible. 

When there arose a question whether France and 
England should not only acknowledge the belligerent 
rights, but should recognize also the political inde- 
pendence of the Southern Confederacy, Historicus, a 
distinguished writer to whom I have already adverted, 
engaged at considerable length in the controversy. 
He referred to former precedents adduced by those 
who advocated recognition, and, amongst others, to 
some measures taken by the American Government 
towards admitting the independence of Hungary, 
when in rebellion against Austria. After quoting a 
note from Wheaton, condemnatory of these manoeuvres, 
the writer remarks that " the authority given to 
Mr. Mann was communicated by the President to 
the Senate, and ordered to be printed. The Austrian 
Government could hardly fail to take notice of a 
proceeding which was little less than an outrage, 
and took occasion to point out to the American 
Government that their agent, if he did not claim the 
character of a minister, ran the risk of being treated 
as a spy. The reply of Mr. Webster is couched in 
that language of overweening insolence towards an 
antagonist in difficulties which is eminently charac- 
teristic ; though when the American Secretary of 
State begs to inform the Austrian Government that 



17 



' the propitious influence of free institutions is exem- 
plified in the unparalleled prosperity of the United 
(States/ one cannot but feel that this sort of vulgar 
braggadocio might, in the present state of things, 
justify a smile even at Vienna." This was written 
during the Southern Civil War, the conduct of the 
Washington Cabinet being described as " a feat of 
smartness which gave just offence to Austria, and 
merited the reprobation of Europe/' 

Just for this present, Trans- Atlantic papers are said 
to have ceased their vituperation of England ; for 
they are endeavouring to drive an exceedingly hard 
bargain, and " their words are softer than butter." 
But it was far otherwise some few years since. Then, 
we were told that the " platform" or programme at 
one of their Presidential elections was "that they 
would have Cuba, and perhaps Jamaica along with 
it." American writers at that time were loud in 
vaunting the power of their nation, " whose immense 
futurity, unrivalled by anything the world has ever 
seen, with territories stretching from ocean to ocean, 
and numbering a population of a hundred millions, 
should cause privilege to shiver and tremble with 
fear in all its fibres and arteries." The Canadas and 
West Indies being — as they predicted — " added to 
their wide dominion, reaching from the frozen seas to 
Panama, American fleets and armies should dominate 
both oceans." Vain illusions ! Even at that moment 
their Union was upon the very brink of dissolution, 



18 



and the civil war waged soon after, has developed 
irreconcileable differences of character and feeling 
which can scarcely be composed. 

Eminent Americans have often contemplated the 
advantages to be derived from a re-partition of their 
Federation into various distinct combinations of 
States ; so that each separate portion might be at 
liberty to pursue whatever course should be best 
suited to its interests or its inclinations. In the event 
of any such disseverance, their historian Cooper con- 
jectured that the manufacturing, maritime Kepublics 
of New England, and the Central Atlantic States, 
" would still keep together, and," as he thinks, " their 
marine would then be larger than if the Confederation 
should exist as it then stood ; since in that case there 
could be but one opinion of its policy. " There is 
indeed no true bond of nationality between the 
different commonwealths, several of whom have from 
time to time taken overt steps towards severing their 
tie with the Union. Thus, New England called a 
convention of its States at Hartford, to consider the 
expediency of concluding a separate treaty of peace 
with Great Britain, during our last war in 1813- 
With a barren soil, in an inclement clime, where there 
is hardly warmth enough to ripen a crop of maize 
this division, which alone can count on a race of 
hardy native seamen, is obviously calculated to become 
a considerable naval power. It has been clearly set 
apart from all the rest, both by usage, by the history 



19 



of its original foundation, and in the high moral 
principles for which it assumes to be still distinguished. 
The great "commercial States of New York, Penn- 
sylvania, New Jersey, Delaware, and Maryland, would 
form an equally distinct Confederacy. So also would 
the Southern Plantation, or Gulf States ; who one 
all revolted in 1861. The North-western common- 
wealths, being purely agricultural, require only a free 
commerce for their produce and imports through the 
St. Lawrence and Mississippi ; untrammelled by 
vexatious dues imposed at the selfish instance of New 
England politicians. Remain the Pacific States, sepa- 
rated from their Eastern compatriots by thousands 
of miles through a vast unpeopled wilderness. What 
possible community of interest can there subsist 
between the two most remote extremes of all these 
sections, — between Massachusetts and California ? 
Unless, indeed, it be for ambitious objects, and in 
order to constitute a great aggressive power. Such 
widely separated populations can be animated by no 
sentiment of affinity, or of brotherhood ; for the 
interests of one State are neither understood nor cared 
for by the others. An enforced union of people so 
opposed in character and views, neither partaking 
of the same advantages, nor solicitous for common 
objects, and unconnected by any reasonable degree of 
propinquity, can never be a source of strength ; and 
it resembles not so much a compact bundle of staves, 
but rather a bag of sand, in which the separate grains, 



20 



though held together for a time, retain always their 
original and distinct individuality, ever prone to fly 
asunder on the first concussion. 

It may not be inappropriate here to quote the 
opinion of an American writer from a recently 
published pamphlet. Speaking of their late civil war, 
he says, " It should be borne in mind, that if England 
had broken the blockade, France would have joined 
her, and it would have been impossible for the North 
to have continued the war. England had but to 
stretch forth her hand, and the North and South 
would have been for ever separated, and England 
by that act, would have secured her dominions in, 
America — dominions which, amalgamated with the 
mother country, would have made her strong for 
ever. The temptation was very great ; but it was 
resisted and overcome. Under the influence of a great 
and noble sentiment, she sacrificed her cotton manu- 
factures and much of her commerce, and cast aside 
her jealousy of the great and to her dangerous power 
of the United States. Whether she acted in this 
with the prudence which usually governs nations in 
their foreign policy, remains to be proved." As 
" France alone makes war for an idea," so England, 
only, maintains peace at any price, from mere kindly 
feelings. 



21 



POSTSCRIPT. 

April 27th, 1872. 
I am desirous of citing some extracts from a 
pamphlet lately published at Washington, and attri- 
buted to an American Jurist of high repute. They 
may serve as an appendix to the foregoing letters. In 
no measured terms the able writer condemns his own 
Government for its palpable inconsistency, contrasting 
their conduct on the Alabama claims with a peremp- 
tory refusal of any compensation for Portuguese 
vessels captured by armed cruisers built, equipped, and 
sailing from American ports, under the unrecognised 
flag of a chief named Artigas, warring against 
Portugal in the Banda Oriental ; although, as the 
Portuguese Minister forcibly represented, General 
Artigas did not anywhere possess a ship, a sailor, or a 
single sea port. These pretended privateers were 
manned by American seamen, some of them being 
commanded even by naval officers in the United 
States' service. Their prizes were brought into 
American ports, and there disposed of by public sale, 
customs duties being regularly paid upon their cargoes 
to the Fedei^al revenue officers. " I can present you," 



22 



affirms the Portuguese envoy, in his remonstrance to 
the American Secretary of State, " with a list of fifty 
Portuguese ships, almost all richly laden, some of 
them East-Indiamen, which have been taken by 
these people during a period of full peace. This is 
not the whole loss we have sustained, the list compre- 
hending only those captures of which I have received 
official complaints. The victims have been many more, 
besides violations of territory, by landing and plunder- 
ing ashore, with shocking circumstances. One city 
alone has armed twenty-six ships which prey upon our 
vitals and many of the leading officials at Baltimore 
were accused of being either the owners, or otherwise 
interested in such adventures. A list of the captured 
vessels is given, and the loss is calculated at more than 
a million and a half of dollars. To all these reclama- 
tions the Cabinet at Washington returned only one 
invariable answer — " that the United States' Govern- 
ment were not responsible for any act of its citizens 
committed out of its jurisdiction and beyond their 
control." Moreover, " Mr. Webster declared that the 
American Government would not tolerate any further 
discussion of the claims in question ; and, conse- 
quently, Portugal, with the becoming humility of a 
small Power, dropped her claims." "Our case," says 
the American jurist, "professes to give the substance 
of this correspondence between our Government and 
that of Portugal upon the claims above referred to. 
It does not give the true substance, but only a 



L.of C. 



23 



deceptive version of that correspondence, as will be 
clearly seen upon a comparison of the above abstract 
with that given in our £ case/ which is a bundle of 
equivocations, concealments, and misrepresentations." 
" Can it be asserted," asks the writer, " that the argu- 
ment on this part of the case is fair, candid, and 
truthful ? The intrepid audacity of its logic is 
unparalleled." " It shows our State department to be 
litigious and overbearing in the highest degree." This 
picture, be it remembered, is drawn by the skilled 
pencil of a native artist. 

A congressional committee of foreign affairs asserted 
that their complaint against Great Britain was based 
upon her premature recognition of the rebels as 
belligerents ; an acknowledgment, however, which 
their own Government admitted to have been in- 
evitable. Still, the Committee declare that " the 
institutions and traditions of the American people 
compel sympathy for the humblest of the human 
family when struggling for liberty ; and that it is 
impossible for them not to wish well to the cause of 
patriots everywhere." The Confederate States once 
separated de facto, are, as the writer observes, "now 
re-admitted into the Union, forming nearly one-half 
of the body called the United States, the complainants 
in the case before the Geneva Board of Arbitration ; 
and if an amount of money were awarded to be paid 
by England to the United States, the very States 
whose cruizers made the captures complained of will 



24 



be the joint recipients of the compensation paid for 
those captures, and will have the joint control and 
disposition of the same. An indemnification for the 
captures made by Confederate cruizers could have 
been obtained from the conquered party, just as 
Germany has recently exacted an indemnification 
from France. The United Sates have extinguished 
this right by restoring the old Union of the States. 
That act renders the further prosecution of these 
claims inequitable, unseemly, and indecorous." " And 
now," adds the writer, " we are are told, we ought to 
make war upon England, on the pretext that she 
aided the Confederacy. But before embarking in that 
war, it may be well to consider what might be the 
action of the ex-Confederate States and the Pacific 
States in certain contingencies." A New York journal, 
usually hostile to this country, confesses that "if 
England dare not go to war with us from the danger 
she would expose herself to from Ireland, still less 
dare we go to war with England, knowing how easily 
she could fan the discontent of the South into a new 
rebellion, which, with the aid of England, might defy 
all our power to subdue." As to any danger to be 
apprehended from Ireland, as this sagacious jurist 
remarks, " it appears to be purely imaginary." Finally, 
he concludes, " Our claims are clear] y unjust. Why 
should we adhere to them ? It is open to us now to 
declare that, even assuming them to have been rightful 
when first presented, they have become extinguished 



25 



by the restoration of the Union ; wherefore we ask 
that the treaty shall be abrogated." Such, also, 
seems to be the almost unanimous judgment of 
England ; for there are many who entirely mistrust 
American rulers, seeing how often they have succeeded 
in circumventing the English Government. 



E. COCK. REM, PRINTER, TORQUAY. 



27 



NOTE. 



It lias been reasonably conjectured that pending 
negotiations between Great Britain and America may- 
be materially affected by the approaching quadrennial 
election of President ; a perpetually recurring agita- 
tion, which could at any time disturb our political 
relations with the United States. But I would 
venture to surmise that the question of Free Trade 
and of a protective Tariff, must also greatly influence 
any Presidential contest ; since, upon this subject, the 
interests of the Southern States with those of the 
powerful North-western Eepublics are clearly identified. 

Years ago, the agricultural commonwealths comprised 
within the Missouri, the Ohio, and the Great Lakes, 
complained that their interests were sacrificed to the 
sordid policy of New England. It was declared that 



28 



these States would no longer consent to pay the taxa- 
tion caused by what was termed a " New England 
war," that of the southern secession. Subsequently, 
however, many heavy taxes have been imposed by 
Congress, whilst an augmented Tariff has been enacted 
whose enhanced duties are levied for the gain of 
Eastern manufacturers, and to the detriment of the 
Western agriculturists ; although it is said that 
wherever the Federal army proved victorious in their 
civil warfare, most of the fighting business was done 
by troops from Ohio, Illinois, and Indiana. New 
England (affirms a Chicago journal) furnished fewer 
soldiers, according to population, than any other 
district of the country ; and she was the only district 
which made money out of the war. So much did she 
make, that it was her interest that the war should 
continue. She made much more out of the war than 
she would have done, but for the Morill Tariff. She 
will pay less taxes, according to population and wealth 
for the war, than any other district of the country ; 
which, at the same time, has been heavily taxed, to 
enable New England to make money out of the war. 
This latter taxation comes of the Morill Tariff. More- 
over the war, which was brought on mainly by New 



29 



England fanaticism, lias destroyed the best market the 
West had for their products. " There is no disguising 
the fact/' adds this journalist, " that the West is tiring 
of this sort of thing, and it will demand that the 
measure of taxation which Congress shall prepare, 
should be fairly adjusted with reference to the relative 
situation of New England, the Middle States, and the 
West There is no negro in this conflict between New 
England and the West, but let New England see to it 
that the conflict does not become irrepressible." Now 
that all the Southern Plantation communities have 
been re-admitted into the Union, being equally con- 
cerned with the Western States in claiming the 
advantages of Free Trade, it seems probable that these 
two great Divisions will generally pull together. 

Eecent diplomatic discussions between the English 
Cabinet and American Rulers, so far from having had 
any conciliatory effect, would appear only to have still 
further prolonged their mutual misapprehensions ; and 
it may well be doubted whether that undue deference 
so often shown by our Government towards the United 
States, out of regard for the " susceptibilities" of our 
captious cousins, may not, by encouraging their un- 
reasonable exactions, tend rather to endanger peace 



30 



between the two countries. The exaggerated compu- 
tation of even direct losses alleged to have been sus- 
tained through captures made by the Alabama and 
her consorts, as stated in the <( American case," affords 
abundant evidence of that grasping disposition which 
actuates the Administration at Washington. 

June 4th, 1872. 



Lofft 



Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process. 
Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: May 2010 

PreservationTechnologies 

A WORLD LEADER IN COLLECTIONS PRESERVATION 

1 1 1 Thomson Park Drive 
Cranberry Township, PA 16066 
(724) 779-2111 



